Imagine having the choice of life or death left in your hands alone. On one end, there is a rat, who is energetically running to find a hiding spot from the broom sweeping across the floor. On the other end, there is a stay-at-home mom, jumped up on the table, violently stabbing at the rat in attempts to scare it away from her. One of them will die. Most people would choose to save the stay-at-home mother with three children and not have a guilty thought cross their mind. But what if the rat died for a purpose? What if scientists were able to gain access to this rat, and it lead to the discovery of a vaccine for AIDS or even cancer?
Good afternoon. I am Jake Derry, and I have come here today with my associates, Veronica Moore and Beth Zinkhan, …show more content…
The Animal Welfare Act has many loopholes and is, moreover, a weak legislation. Surprisingly, rats, mice, birds and cold-blooded creatures, which make up nearly 99% of tested animals in the US, are unprotected by the Animal Welfare Act, according to statistics from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Furthermore, the legislation does not completely protect the included animals from abusive practices, because these federal laws are not well-enforced. In 2012 and 2013, the USDA found the Yerkes Primate Center non-compliant on the negligent deaths of three monkeys. In a routine inspection on July 19, 2012, the USDA investigated the death of two monkeys who suffered fatal wounds after being placed in the incorrect enclosure and another monkey euthanized after a rubber band became embedded in the monkey’s wrist. Still, the Yerkes Primate Center was not fined. As demonstrated by this case, potential violation has little risk to any corporation. Animal cruelty legislation requires the use of analgesics during painful testing. Furthermore, the FDA Drug Approval Process requires animal testing on potential drugs. But, does this follow the moral guidelines of the business …show more content…
Animal testing is a crucial part of ensuring the safety of products for humans, but they should not be the first and only test. Testing should be performed in a chain. The first test should be on the cells themself to test and examine the drug on a microscopic level. If this level is achieved with no harmful effects, it should move on to the next which my team believes should be performed on laboratory-grown organelles, such as an in-vitro brain. Once this level is completed safely, the tests should now be safe for animal testing. Once the animal trials are performed and proven safe, human trials should be necessary before being released onto the market. Animal testing is necessary, as proven by the drug BIA 10-2474. On January 22, 2016, a report was released by Forbes magazine stating that a human trial conducted without previous animal testing resulted in the death of six trial participants. This proves that animal testing increased the safety of a human participating in trials for the benefit of society. Johnson and Johnson stated, “Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies.” But with the inclusion of in vitro testing, along with other forms of testing, the chances of a drug working in clinical trials should be improved. As Larry Prusak once said, “"The only thing that gives an organization a
Good afternoon. I am Jake Derry, and I have come here today with my associates, Veronica Moore and Beth Zinkhan, …show more content…
The Animal Welfare Act has many loopholes and is, moreover, a weak legislation. Surprisingly, rats, mice, birds and cold-blooded creatures, which make up nearly 99% of tested animals in the US, are unprotected by the Animal Welfare Act, according to statistics from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Furthermore, the legislation does not completely protect the included animals from abusive practices, because these federal laws are not well-enforced. In 2012 and 2013, the USDA found the Yerkes Primate Center non-compliant on the negligent deaths of three monkeys. In a routine inspection on July 19, 2012, the USDA investigated the death of two monkeys who suffered fatal wounds after being placed in the incorrect enclosure and another monkey euthanized after a rubber band became embedded in the monkey’s wrist. Still, the Yerkes Primate Center was not fined. As demonstrated by this case, potential violation has little risk to any corporation. Animal cruelty legislation requires the use of analgesics during painful testing. Furthermore, the FDA Drug Approval Process requires animal testing on potential drugs. But, does this follow the moral guidelines of the business …show more content…
Animal testing is a crucial part of ensuring the safety of products for humans, but they should not be the first and only test. Testing should be performed in a chain. The first test should be on the cells themself to test and examine the drug on a microscopic level. If this level is achieved with no harmful effects, it should move on to the next which my team believes should be performed on laboratory-grown organelles, such as an in-vitro brain. Once this level is completed safely, the tests should now be safe for animal testing. Once the animal trials are performed and proven safe, human trials should be necessary before being released onto the market. Animal testing is necessary, as proven by the drug BIA 10-2474. On January 22, 2016, a report was released by Forbes magazine stating that a human trial conducted without previous animal testing resulted in the death of six trial participants. This proves that animal testing increased the safety of a human participating in trials for the benefit of society. Johnson and Johnson stated, “Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies.” But with the inclusion of in vitro testing, along with other forms of testing, the chances of a drug working in clinical trials should be improved. As Larry Prusak once said, “"The only thing that gives an organization a